 |
 |
   Dan Savage, the brilliant and foul-mouthed sex columnist, has become one of the most important ethicists in America. Are we screwed?
 The federal government is supposed to issue new rules about debt levels for students in for-profit colleges. In the meantime, the states are working on their own regulations.
 Washingtons budget hawks want to decimate the federal workforce to shrink the deficit. It will have the opposite effect.
 There arent nearly enough counterterrorism experts to instruct all of Americas police. So we got these guys instead.
|
   |
|
|
March 18, 2010
CBO DELIVERS LONG-AWAITED SCORE.... No more excuses. This week, a variety of wavering House Democrats that they wouldn't make up their minds on health care reform until they got the final score on the package from the Congressional Budget Office. It took longer than expected, but the CBO has weighed in. Democrats looking for an encouraging score should be thrilled.
The legislation is fully paid for, reduces the deficit in this decade, and even more in the next decade. It will bring coverage to 32 million Americans -- slightly better than the earlier estimate -- and extend Medicare solvency by at least 9 years while closing the prescription drug "donut hole." Generally, when a report like this comes out, both parties find specific points to suggest that the score helps their side, not the other. But a report like this one should prove exceedingly difficult for Republicans to spin. If I had to guess, the GOP will talk up the overall price tag -- it's a 10-year, $940 billion package -- because it slightly exceeds the $900 billion ceiling originally talked about. But for anyone serious about the substance, condemning health care reform over a $4 billion-a-year difference is pretty silly. By any reasonable measure, this is a very strong CBO score, which should push some on-the-fence Democrats off the fence and into the "yes" column. No more "wait and see"; no more excuses. This is a reform package that works, and does exactly what these Democratic holdouts say they want. And with this, the clock starts on the final vote. If the leadership can get 216 votes together, House members will decide the fate of health care reform on Sunday morning -- 72 hours from now. —Steve Benen 9:45 AM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (19)
Comments
Just faxed my Blue Dog--Jim Matheson--and told him to do the right thing and support this bill. After all the damage he's done siding with the Previous Administration it's the least he can do. Now we'll see. . . Posted by: Michigoose on March 18, 2010 at 9:58 AM | PERMALINKNo more excuses is right. And if they do have excuses by all means, put them out there, put on the White House website or something. You are a representative are you not? Then REPRESENT. After Kucinich and a couple of Stupak's friends have switched their votes, and with this great news from CBO, the Democratic caucus has absolutely no excuse for failing to Pass This Damn Bill. I'm hoping that Anh Cao votes for it again, too. I kinda like that guy. Posted by: Kris on March 18, 2010 at 10:04 AM | PERMALINKAt last. We're on the final lap. Cue massive wingnut whining. Posted by: JPS on March 18, 2010 at 10:05 AM | PERMALINKMy representative — Bob Goodlatte — is not the most reprehensible Republican out there. But, he is flatly against meaningful healthcare regulation of any kind. When I called his office yesterday to voice my wish that he vote for the bill, the woman on the phone sounded legitimately shocked and asked me why I would want him to do that. When I gave my many reasons, she just said, "Huh. Well, I'll be sure and tell him." Sure you will, Agnes. Sure you will. Posted by: chrenson on March 18, 2010 at 10:08 AM | PERMALINKBut a report like this one should prove exceedingly difficult for Republicans to spin... Really Steve, where have you been the last year? Posted by: martin on March 18, 2010 at 10:09 AM | PERMALINKBut I saw a teabagger sign that totally destroys the CBO reasoning! Posted by: norbizness on March 18, 2010 at 10:10 AM | PERMALINK"My representative — Bob Goodlatte — is not the most reprehensible Republican out there. But, he is flatly against meaningful healthcare regulation of any kind." Goodlatte is my congresscritter too. It never occurred to me to call his office, i figured him to be a lost cause. I was thinking about calling Boucher and Perrillo to offer *support* in their re-elections if they vote for the bill. Posted by: els on March 18, 2010 at 10:19 AM | PERMALINKUnless the Senate parliamentarian refuses to certify minor parts of the reconciliation bill. Posted by: Christopher on March 18, 2010 at 10:20 AM | PERMALINK"But for anyone serious about the substance, condemning health care reform over a $4 billion-a-year difference is pretty silly..." That's true Steve, but the GOP will scream that the bill is even more costly than first predicted, and the media will dutifully give us headlines that read: "CBO says bill will cost 40B more than expected." Posted by: Simon on March 18, 2010 at 10:28 AM | PERMALINKImpossible for Republicans to spin? "Obama took another $40 billion of your money and bribed the CBO to get a good score!" Maybe not that blatant, but they WILL attack the CBO. Posted by: Newton Whale on March 18, 2010 at 10:31 AM | PERMALINKI rarely hear it said, but isn't the price tag of health care less than the price tag of the Iraq War (or it may have been the combined wars number that i saw). Shouldn't this be an obvious point that if we were willing to spend so much money to keep Iraqis safe, should we ill Americans be an even higher priority. Posted by: Razdoctor on March 18, 2010 at 10:35 AM | PERMALINKI rarely hear it said, but isn't the price tag of health care less than the price tag of the Iraq War (or it may have been the combined wars number that i saw). Shouldn't this be an obvious point that if we were willing to spend so much money to keep Iraqis safe, should we ill Americans be an even higher priority. Posted by: Razdoctor on March 18, 2010 at 10:41 AM | PERMALINKCurrent (10:43 Eastern) Headlines CNN.com - Health care bill will cost $940 billion The wierdest (most unexpected) is: Maybe ABC and Fox have not received their rethug talking points memos yet! Quick question as I debate wingnut friends. When they say it is "fully paid for" what do they mean? How is it fully paid for exactly? Does this mean that it does not add to the national debt at all? Posted by: Palooza on March 18, 2010 at 10:59 AM | PERMALINK"Does this mean that it does not add to the national debt at all?" ------- Yes "How is it fully paid for exactly?" ------ a combination of taxes (eg: on the wealthiest, on cadillac health plans,etc), and spending cuts (eg: medicare) Posted by: JPS on March 18, 2010 at 11:08 AM | PERMALINKThe legislation is fully paid for, reduces the deficit in this decade Goody! Then the Republicans will stop claiming the bill adds to the deficit, right? Right...? If only we could count on the so-called "liberal media" not to treat objectively false Republcian claims as truth. SadOldVet, sadly, nails it. The so-called "liberal media" will likely report the bottom line and omit the context of the cost savings. Feh. Post a comment
May 2011
April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003 March 2003 February 2003 January 2003 December 2002 |
|
|
    |
|
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
buy from Amazon and
support the Monthly
|
||||||||
